Epigenetic reprogramming rewires transcription during the alternation of generations in Arabidopsis

  1. Michael Borg
  2. Ranjith K Papareddy
  3. Rodolphe Dombey
  4. Elin Axelsson
  5. Michael D Nodine
  6. David Twell
  7. Frédéric Berger  Is a corresponding author
  1. Gregor Mendel Institute, Austria
  2. University of Leicester, United Kingdom

Abstract

Alternation between morphologically distinct haploid and diploid life forms is a defining feature of most plant and algal life cycles, yet the underlying molecular mechanisms that govern these transitions remain unclear. Here, we explore the dynamic relationship between chromatin accessibility and epigenetic modifications during life form transitions in Arabidopsis. The diploid-to-haploid life form transition is governed by the loss of H3K9me2 and DNA demethylation of transposon-associated cis-regulatory elements. This event is associated with dramatic changes in chromatin accessibility and transcriptional reprogramming. In contrast, the global loss of H3K27me3 in the haploid form shapes a chromatin accessibility landscape that is poised to re-initiate the transition back to diploid life after fertilization. Hence, distinct epigenetic reprogramming events rewire transcription through major reorganization of the regulatory epigenome to guide the alternation of generations in flowering plants.

Data availability

Deep-sequencing data that support the findings of this study have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) under accession code GSE155369. Re-analysis of previously published DNA methylomes from dme-2/+ pollen (Ibarra et al., 2012), and siRNAs from leaves (Papareddy et al., 2020) and pollen (Borges et al., 2018; Slotkin et al., 2009) were deposited in the GEO under accession code GSE155369.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michael Borg

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3982-3843
  2. Ranjith K Papareddy

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Rodolphe Dombey

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3670-4128
  4. Elin Axelsson

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4382-1880
  5. Michael D Nodine

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. David Twell

    Department of Genetics, University of Leicester, Leicester, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Frédéric Berger

    Gregor Mendel Institute, Vienna, Austria
    For correspondence
    Frederic.berger@gmi.oeaw.ac.at
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3609-8260

Funding

Austrian Science Fund (P26887)

  • Frédéric Berger

Austrian Science Fund (I 4258)

  • Frédéric Berger

Austrian Science Fund (I2163-B16)

  • Frédéric Berger

Austrian Science Fund (M1818)

  • Michael Borg

European Commission (ERC 637888)

  • Michael D Nodine

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/I011269/1)

  • David Twell

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/N005090)

  • David Twell

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2021, Borg et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 6,111
    views
  • 895
    downloads
  • 67
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Michael Borg
  2. Ranjith K Papareddy
  3. Rodolphe Dombey
  4. Elin Axelsson
  5. Michael D Nodine
  6. David Twell
  7. Frédéric Berger
(2021)
Epigenetic reprogramming rewires transcription during the alternation of generations in Arabidopsis
eLife 10:e61894.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61894

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61894

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Laurel A Rohde, Arianne Bercowsky-Rama ... Andrew C Oates
    Research Article

    Rhythmic and sequential segmentation of the growing vertebrate body relies on the segmentation clock, a multi-cellular oscillating genetic network. The clock is visible as tissue-level kinematic waves of gene expression that travel through the presomitic mesoderm (PSM) and arrest at the position of each forming segment. Here, we test how this hallmark wave pattern is driven by culturing single maturing PSM cells. We compare their cell-autonomous oscillatory and arrest dynamics to those we observe in the embryo at cellular resolution, finding similarity in the relative slowing of oscillations and arrest in concert with differentiation. This shows that cell-extrinsic signals are not required by the cells to instruct the developmental program underlying the wave pattern. We show that a cell-autonomous timing activity initiates during cell exit from the tailbud, then runs down in the anterior-ward cell flow in the PSM, thereby using elapsed time to provide positional information to the clock. Exogenous FGF lengthens the duration of the cell-intrinsic timer, indicating extrinsic factors in the embryo may regulate the segmentation clock via the timer. In sum, our work suggests that a noisy cell-autonomous, intrinsic timer drives the slowing and arrest of oscillations underlying the wave pattern, while extrinsic factors in the embryo tune this timer’s duration and precision. This is a new insight into the balance of cell-intrinsic and -extrinsic mechanisms driving tissue patterning in development.

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Jayanarayanan Sadanandan, Sithara Thomas ... Peeyush Kumar T
    Research Article

    The blood-brain barrier (BBB) controls the movement of molecules into and out of the central nervous system (CNS). Since a functional BBB forms by mouse embryonic day E15.5, we reasoned that gene cohorts expressed in CNS endothelial cells (EC) at E13.5 contribute to BBB formation. In contrast, adult gene signatures reflect BBB maintenance mechanisms. Supporting this hypothesis, transcriptomic analysis revealed distinct cohorts of EC genes involved in BBB formation and maintenance. Here, we demonstrate that epigenetic regulator’s histone deacetylase 2 (HDAC2) and polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) control EC gene expression for BBB development and prevent Wnt/β-catenin (Wnt) target genes from being expressed in adult CNS ECs. Low Wnt activity during development modifies BBB genes epigenetically for the formation of functional BBB. As a Class-I HDAC inhibitor induces adult CNS ECs to regain Wnt activity and BBB genetic signatures that support BBB formation, our results inform strategies to promote BBB repair.